Introduction

I think the vikings weren’t violent… Read it if you want to know why!

Reasons

My first reason is that they lived in Scandinavia where food was hard to get, so they had to leave their country to raid Christian monasteries in Britain for gold, food and other supplies essential for surviving.

In addition to hunger, the vikings were clever and invented the days of the week using their Norse gods,developed their own language,the old Norse language and invented words we still use today like die,ugly,skull and even cake! (when I found this out, I  was surprised)

As well as all the other reasons listed, the vikings always had a reason to ‘attack’ such as a raid but where we get the idea of killing monks is from  self defence. Also, Britain was across one sea so it was easy to sail too from Scandinavia.

Last but not least is the Berserkers they were a tribe of vikings who were always violent but they always had a reason for it .

 Berserkers

Do the Vikings deserve their violent reputation?

I think that the Vikings don’t deserve their violent reputation for the following reasons:

Firstly, most Vikings were farmers, traders or explorers so they wouldn’t have been fighting and killing and destroying other tribes. Only a tribe of Vikings called the Beserkers went on the rampage; killing people. Some Vikings were so brave that they sailed all of the way to America just for exploration!

Secondly, no other tribe had ever been into Viking settlements so they had no idea about what the peaceful, majestic inside was like. These humans were feared all throughout Europe for no reason at all. Other people could only see the ruthless side of them. This tribe was as bad as the Romans or Anglo Saxons at peak. Some had proper mechanical powers to build sleek, powerful boats called longships. THE VIKINGS WERE AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!                             

 

Did the vikings deserve their violent reputation?

I think the vikings did deserve their violent reputation because they used to  raid monastries and villages to loot food money and treasure and they used to kill the monks .I think instead of just killing the monks they could have just took it without killing them.They scared people and children across the country and that is how they earned their violent reputation.

Do the Vikings deserve their violent reputation?

I think the Vikings don’t deserve their violent reputation for the following reasons.

• The vikings came to Britain because their homes (in Scandinavia) had a lot of floods.
• The vikings wanted to be farmers.
• Some of the vikings were friendly to people.
• The vikings needed food & water so they wouldn’t die.
• They defended them selves most of the time.
• They are an important  of british history.

The vikings came to Britain because  they wanted to farm but they couldn’t in Scandinavia. They couldn’t do much and would be hard to get around Scandinavia.

I think the Vikings do  not deserve the violent reputation for the following reasons.

I think that they should not do it because it was very cold for them so they had to go. There were lots of farmers there and the viking people came to Britain because they felt there was not enough food for them in their own country. They came here because there was lots of floods there so they had to leave from there. The viking people needed food so they had to kill the animals because they could not live like that. They also had to kill animals because they are farmers and they did not have any food so that was the only  thing to do for them.

I think that the vikings don’t deserve there violent reputation  because they had to raid places to live the cold winter months in scandinavia. In scandinavia  the weather was horrible  and the crops coudn’t  grow but on the other hand some vikings were pretty rough.

v

vthere houses were peaceful

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do the Vikings deserve their bad reputation?

I think they don’t deserve their bad reputation because in Scandanavia  there is no food and farmland so the Vikings came for food  and Anglo-Saxsons ,Romans said no so they had to fight for food and land and they had to survive so how.And if someone was trying to kill you some how would you defend your self? [I would] .But some of them were farmers and the Beserkers were actally trying to kill the monks for nothing.And like i said before most of them were ordinary people.

This is what i disagree with.

People were saying that they do deserve their bad repution besause they killed people but that were the beserkers that

killed people for war so what do you think[i hope you say they don’t]. 

 

 

 

I think they don’t deserve their violent reputation for the following reasons.

Firstly, most of them were farmers. They were just eating animals.

secondly,they had to leav scandiaver .

thirdly the bersker came first

I think the vikings don’t deserve their violent reputation for the following reasons.

They don’t because only the berserkers  killed,all the others were farmers or familys  that needed food. The  vikings were from Scandinavia and there were lots of floods and their farmland were very poor.Also they were just defending  themselves.They were friendly people.Some of the vikings were farmers.

In conclusion I think the vikings did not deserve their violent reputation.